Discussant's response to future directions for auditing research;

Page 1

Discussant's Response to
Future Directions for Auditing Research
Frederick L. Neumann
University of Illinois
We are indebted to Mr. Carmichael for stimulating our awareness of audit­ing
as a subject for research, for broadening our perspective as to the challenges it presents, and for reminding us of the varied forms such research may take.
One of the difficulties in discussing research is the plethora of terms, the abundance of jargon, and the attendant confusion which inevitably results from the clash of varying philosophies that abound in this area. In this respect, at least, it's easy to believe that scientists were called philosophers well into the middle of the last century.
One of the first exercises we assign our Masters' students in their research course is to have them define and discuss their concept of research. You would be amazed at the range of views this term conjures up. It is for this reason that, when discussing this area, one must be very careful in defining terms and creat­ing
classifications to be sure they are not only understood but are also appropriate to the intended use. We must try to select those properties for partitioning our subject matter which will provide the most useful set of pigeonholes for the pur­pose
at hand. I would like to employ some of the classifications used in Mr. Carmichael's paper as a means of discussing some of the issues they raise.
Theoretical vs. Applied Research
For example, it is inevitable that one or more of our Masters' students will introduce the theoretical vs. applied dichotomy in discussing research. This dis­tinction
may have some advantages conceptually, but it can be confusing when applied to actual research. It may be used with some benefit to describe the motivation for specific research, but it can be misleading if employed to label the results.
I can understand Mr. Carmichael's considerable interest in applied auditing research but the role of theoretical research in auditing should not be neglected. (Hopefully, I will be able to avoid any of the semantic traps I have warned against above.)
Kerlinger defines theory as "... a set of interrelated constructs, definitions, and propositions that presents a systematic view of phenomena by specifying re­lations
among variables, with the purpose of explaining and predicting phe­nomena."
1
The role of theory is to provide general explanations of empirical events and objects to enable us to link together our knowledge of separate occurrences and predict events yet unknown. It helps to identify relevant variables and the
112